The Death Penalty in the OSCE Area–Background Paper 2019 The Situation of the Death Penalty in the OSCE Area 1. Arguments used to retain or eventually reintroduce the death penalty Fifty-five (55) OSCE participating States have either completely abolished the death penalty or maintain moratoria on executions as an important first step towards abolition. However, in a global context where discussions focus on the threat of terrorism and a need to be tough on crime, it is perhaps not surprising that the question of reintroducing the death penalty surfaces at times, including in the OSCE region. As ODIHR Director Ingibjörg Sólrún G��sladóttir stated in October 2018, the idea of reinstating capital punishment in specific instances is worrying, and runs entirely counter to the global trend towards abolition.26 It is, therefore, a good moment to reflect on the reasons why there is still support for the death penalty, considering the growing understanding that capital punishment is a cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. Some of the most persistent arguments used to justify the use of the death penalty and its possible reintroduction will be discussed below. “The death penalty is legal” The death penalty was, to a certain extent, legally condoned in international law at the early stage of development of the modern day human rights framework, in view of its ultimate abolition. Article 6 (2) of the ICCPR clearly states the conditions under 26  “On International Day against Death Penalty, OSCE/ODIHR Director raises concern over suggestions in some states to reintroduce capital punishment in certain instances”, OSCE/ODIHR, 10 October 2018, <https://www.osce.org/odihr/399284>. 13